I have never demanded scientific proof of God I just challenge you to provide evidence.
Ok, let's try again...
If not scientific evidence then what is exactly the type of evidence you're talking about?
John_Mann
JoinedPosts by John_Mann
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
But it's a cult.
I keep saying not as insult but trying to make you see you are following a cult and are not even aware of that.
But you keep demanding evidence and I know you are actually referring to scientific evidence.
I already explained to you that physical evidence its not the same as scientific evidence.
You seem to be totally blind about the existence of several types of evidence.
You're in a serious denial mode.
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
Interesting but none of this justifies John_Mann's frequent and unjustified use of "scientism" as an insult in this forum.
Actually I don't use scientism as an insult because ultimately scientism is a metaphysical position. I just consider scientism logically flawed.
Catholicism for instance is a metaphysical position too and is non-scientific. But the problem of scientism is that are not just unscientific but pseudoscience. Scientism tries to pass as science.
When you demand scientific evidence for the existence of God you are mixing up science with metaphysics in a very messy way and this is scientism. Liking you or not.
But my intention it's not to insult you, I'm trying to help you.
I recognize a searcher of truth in you but you're following a very contradictory path.
If you want to refute the existence of God you must do that with philosophy and not by demanding scientific evidence.
You could start by refuting the St. Anselm's ontological argument for instance and not just calling it sophistry.
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
rule of thumb based on intuition.
Exactly!
Totally unscientific but it works.
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
Lately there's a better awareness about scientism like these funny memes around the Internet:
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
So basically just maths then?
Actually we use more the heuristic method than the scientific method.
And it works.
The scientific method is very very limited. Even between areas of science the scientific method must be adapted. The scientific method is not even universal among the areas of science.
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
I am deeply suspicious of a lot of what people label as metaphysics.
Most of the time my specif topic from metaphysics is ontology.
What is matter?
What is matter without an observer?
What is exactly the difference between something that went out of existence from something that has drastically changed?
Throughout our lifetimes we change drastically (even losing vital organs) but we dont cease to exist. Is clinical death the exit from existence or just an extreme change?
What's the difference between a perfect description of something from the thing in itself?
These are not scientific questions. So we access knowledge from universe beyond the scientific method. That's metaphysics.
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
Does history count as knowledge? For example.
Marxism is based on the idea that history is reduced to matter. Crazy idea called historical materialism. It's a kind of scientism.
Everything must be material even beauty must be explained. Music is only matter and motion for instance.
That's why modern art is so ugly.
One characteristic of truth is beauty.
-
51
Why are the evolutionist's so upset?
by Esse quam videri inso many evolutionist's on this forum are upset at the terror attacks in europe such as recently in sweden.
it is just a logical step in the evolution of the human race.
should you not rather be celebrating the great changes taking place right before your eyes and constructing detailed explanations of the cell structure and dna development in the human brain.. you can't eat your cake and still have it.
-
-
John_Mann
Yes I can see the flaw in JW logic about blood. The symbol (blood meaning life) itself is more important than the real thing (life).
But I don't see the JW doctrine of blood being an analogy of how Law consider the human superiority.
-
147
Scientism - Nothing But a Childish Insult?
by cofty init is not uncommon for theists to accuse rational people on this forum of "scientism".. in my opinion it is nothing but a cheap shot from those who know they lack evidence for their beliefs.
if something like "scientism" actually does exist then i have never encountered it.. here is part of an exchange from another thread - i have brought it here as it was off-topic.... scientism = claim of scientific method being universal and the only valid method of knowledge.
followers of scientism always demand scientific evidence to anything.
-
-
John_Mann
I asked you for a specific example of something we could learn "about the universe" from a source other than the application of science. You refused to give one so we are no further forward.
Music is one example.
Do you mean like expecting science to tell us whether we ought to prefer pistachio or chocolate ice cream?
Exactly.
On the other hand when theists claim that god acts in the physical world - as you have - it is entirely reasonable to turn to science to investigate those claims. That would be a proper application of science.
Even if we have a physical evidence like a medical cure for instance it's not possible to consider this physical evidence as scientific evidence because repeatability.
If someone claims to have been cured then we can scientifically investigate if such cure indeed had occurred. But we can't put a scientific evidence about the cause of such cure.
The Catholic Church for instance demands a scientific evidence about cures. The scientific evidence will only states that some improbable cure had occurred and that's it. The scientific evidence can't say if was a paranormal cure. Usually the scientific conclusion is just "no natural explanation found".
There's a very defined line when science ends and metaphysical claims can be made upon it.
Particularly I think clinical cures are rare and only occurs in a Catholic context.